The other two not so well-liked Ghostbusters films depending on who you ask. The only sequel to the universally beloved original and the extremely divisive 2016 reboot. Which of the two do you prefer?

GB2 and it's not even a contest. Always thought it was a great sequel and I enjoy it as much as the original. I find it just as clever and creative as the first and like the first it has a wonderful balance of Horror and humor. I can never imagine Ghostbusters without GB2.

The reboot wasn't as bad as expected but not good, either. It had potential and even some okay moments but overall was heavily bogged down by the immature jokes and flat humor, insulting stereotypes of both genders, non-threatening lead villain and very cartoony visuals. A movie I forgot about right after I saw it. GB2 for me is just as enjoyable and memorable as the first. I struggle to remember much of anything from the reboot. It's unfortunate because the reboot had great potential and even showed signs of intelligence at times, but it's all caught up in the numerous things wrong with it.

Ghostbusters 2 was my first Ghostbusters I saw in theatres back in the day (wow, 30 years next year... D: ). At the time, I liked it even more than the first, probably because I was the target audience. As time went on, I liked it less and less, but since 2016's flick, Ghostbusters 2 came back with nostalgic memories: seeing it with my father and sister, renting it endlessly on VHS, the feeling of watching something I was hoping was only the second of many films to come (boy, was I wrong), drew imaginary posters of what the logo would look like till Ghostbusters 10 (hardly a chance for that to happen) XD

You can say because of Ghostbusters 2, summer of 1989 (yeah, same summer as the kids from the new "It"... OMG!! The parallels!!!) turned out to be an awesome one.

But I grew up a very sarcastic, cynical adult that completely rendered me impervious to whatever would NOT be Ghostbusters 3. I won't delve into why I wanted a Ghostbusters 3, it's been talked to death and even hurt any and all sequels from ever happening, so I'll keep it shut.

And so, the reboot had me poker-faced throughout the entire thing. I did not laugh, I did not completely hate, but I certainly was not entertained. The humor fell flat on its face, the pacing of the story was almost non-existent, the cameos were waste of good talents, etc. Honestly, until the movie started, I was sincerely hoping the trailers were only going to be trolling and we were going to see the REAL movie on-screen. And man did that help me descend to new levels of "non-entertainment".

The only good memory I got out of it? Here it is: it was my first event with my Ghostbusters friends. We dressed up, welcomed people, took photos, etc. It was a hell of a fun ride just to meet with people and have them feel like we were legit ghost hunters.

Now, I can't say the 2016 movie is the worse thing that could happen in the world, but it certainly is enough of a bad thing to have crippled the franchise. However, I do happen to watch it from time to time to reminisce what time I got with my friends, so it's still a bitter-sweet sentiment rather than a completely bitter one.

But Ghostbusters 2 takes the cake (and eats it too). It's sure not as good as the first one, but it does feel like seeing old friends you had not heard from in ages. You meet, greet, have a good time together and when it's time to part ways, you feel it was worth it.

But Ghostbusters 2 takes the cake (and eats it too). It's sure not as good as the first one, but it does feel like seeing old friends you had not heard from in ages. You meet, greet, have a good time together and when it's time to part ways, you feel it was worth it.

Such a great way to describe GB2. It's like being with old friends on a new adventure and having a great time.

If you haven't done so I would recommend you to watch the "extended" edition of ATC. It had me seriously laughing hard. The theatrical release was nowhere near the same. Maybe because of the really absurd humor or adult language, I don't know.

And somehow, it still just won't stick with me. There's something in me that just can't be as open-minded to accept THIS as the FIRST Ghostbusters movie in 27 years (not like they didn't have time to prepare something GOOD), but honestly, I just can't watch it for more than 45 minutes.

I was one of the people who hated the trailer and stayed poker-faced during the entire screening (thank God it was free)... and the first time the extended edition got to play, there was the same poker-face... except it had a bit of added cringe because of all the dance numbers and more empty improv moments :/

What can I say, I'm showing my age and my discontent for poorly put together products that pass as movies :/

Recently, I grew quite cynical (for personal reasons) and lost quite a lot of faith in today's cinema... I'll admit it made me less open to "mistakes" or movies that could have been done so much better, especially when one movie has 27 years to develop... let's just say you have the best approach.

I, on the other hand, have become mostly uncompromising... especially when studios can put as much money as needed on screen.

Yeah, I'm just an old fart who wants to see the glory of the 80s back on screen with all its political incorrectness, bizarre humor, comedic performances and fun antics that I oh so miss from today's flicks...

However, I have to say not all recent movies are bad: Deadpool, Mad Max Fury Road, War of the planet of the Apes, 2005's King Kong, Godzilla (2014) and more, are among my favorite popcorn blockbusters because most of them took chances (not all, but most).

Yeah, I'm just an old fart who wants to see the glory of the 80s back on screen with all its political incorrectness, bizarre humor, comedic performances and fun antics that I oh so miss from today's flicks...

Agree. Stuff has gotten stale recently in certain respects, but better in terms of others. But as with most large scale entertainment projects, economics has begun to play a larger part nowadays.

Now with ATC (extended being much better IMO) the expectation was simply too great. Yeah they should have used the real prime characters as cameo's sure. But fanservice was very well done by Feig. It was an expensive, well shot, pretty well written greatly Effects driven piece. It really wasn't that bad. I feel good that it breathed life into the franchise.

I think they should mix and match the 84 and 16 characters. Imagine if Holtzmann ended up in '84 in some dimensional rift, meeting the guys. The possibilities for comedy in contrastic the world of the 80's with todays is immense. Egon: "that woman terrifies me Ray". Or Venkman and Yates driving each other nuts. Or one of the prime guys ending up today, helping along in a bust, etc. I'd love to see that. In a way it would transcend the divide in the franchise and embrace it by acknowledging everyone 80's and today, and make everyone happy.

Last edited by One time on February 21st, 2018, 5:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Honestly? I don't think GB2 was that much better than the reboot. While the reboot had a lot of problems it probably had just as many funny parts as GB2 did. You could just tell with GB2 they were doing it because they had to, not because they really wanted to.

I rewatched GB2 recently and it reminded me that I felt that the movie was a repeat of the first movie when I saw it in the theaters when it was first released. I felt a bit disappointed after seeing that movie in the theaters.

I enjoyed ATC and for me it brought me back into the fandom. Before that I had left the fandom as the forums to me had nothing new. I was not into the cartoons, comics or video games. I find this has happened with the Space 1999 and Stargate forums. With Stargate there were so many threads on the episodes, costumes and props. It was surprising how quickly the forums died when there were no new episodes.

I refused to see the reboot because the trailers made all the female protagonists look too stereotypical. To me there is only Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters 2 along with the X-Box 360 game. I am tired of remakes anyway except superhero ones. Though at least with superhero ones you can always use new villains that haven't been used before.

The other two not so well-liked Ghostbusters films depending on who you ask. The only sequel to the universally beloved original and the extremely divisive 2016 reboot. Which of the two do you prefer?

GB2 and it's not even a contest. Always thought it was a great sequel and I enjoy it as much as the original. I find it just as clever and creative as the first and like the first it has a wonderful balance of Horror and humor. I can never imagine Ghostbusters without GB2.

The reboot wasn't as bad as expected but not good, either. It had potential and even some okay moments but overall was heavily bogged down by the immature jokes and flat humor, insulting stereotypes of both genders, non-threatening lead villain and very cartoony visuals. A movie I forgot about right after I saw it. GB2 for me is just as enjoyable and memorable as the first. I struggle to remember much of anything from the reboot. It's unfortunate because the reboot had great potential and even showed signs of intelligence at times, but it's all caught up in the numerous things wrong with it.

Pretty much exactly how I feel about the reboot. I didn't hate it, especially the frothing hate I've seen over it. It had some good parts, and I did have some genuine laughs. But it kept making me cringe at other parts too. It overall felt like they were trying too hard to make it something it didn't need to be or shouldn't be, and it suffered for it. Watching it I kept having a feeling of just how much potential it could have had. I should note I only have seen the extended cut version. [I also don't think it would have derailed more plans for the IP if the marketing had been different/the team didn't react to the reactions like they did.]

I love GB2. Actually I may like it more than GB1 just because of how many times I've seen it. It's my comfort movie when I want to watch something that makes me feel uplifted. It's campy and more cartoony than the first movie, but I love the themes of it. *shrug*

No competition. GB 2 wins by a country mile. It isnt even close. GB2 is actually, ya know, funny. It has something to say that's pretty universal. It's not perfect(the climax is over waaay to quick and its awkwardly paced/filmed due to obvious reshoots & last minute changes. Not once do you see Vigo & the GBs in the same frame or in a wide shot).

I love ILM's work and consider every design but Slimer to be an improvement over BOSS films work on GB1. Both schedules were insanely rushed so it's a miracle any of this works at all.

Comparing the GB2 script to the finished film is very interesting, the script is more like a blue print. Many scenes are missing from the script and were written during production/post production. The entire subway sequence? Not in the script. The Fire at GB HQ with Winston saving the day? Not in the script. It works both ways too. Plenty of scenes in the script are not in the finished film.

GB2016 is dead on arrival. I've mentioned my problems with the film many times on here so I'll skip that. It's just a mess. It just kills me this is the film we got after waiting for a GB3 for what seemed like a lifetime(or in my case, it was a lifetime since I was born in '88). Needless to say, I was crushed with disappointment. As some on here can attest it took a long time for me to get over the wasted opportunity & blunder Sony had made. Sometimes I think I'm still not over it lol.

The one and only postive GB2016 has had is that it has brought in a new generation of fans who will hopefully fall in love with the originals & made GB feel accessible to anyone no matter your race or gender(granted Extreme Ghostbusters already did a much better job of that 20 years prior...but I digress).

I've never been a big fan of GB2. Compared to GB1 it was a real let down for me. They went way too hokey and kid-centric for my tastes. However, when placed next to GB2016 it is a work of art. Even with the change of tone, general vibe and cheese I would still put on GB 2 regularly and catch it if it came on TV. I would and can still watch it and get some form of enjoyment and substance from it. The movie still had heart and was well enough made to engage me and even make me laugh and smile. I find as I get older I have grown to appreciate it more. But it's still not as good as the first.

I love ILM's work and consider every design but Slimer to be an improvement over BOSS films work on GB1.

We're gonna have to disagree on that one. Slimer looked waaaaay better in GB1. I can't stand GB2 Slimer.

GB2016 on the other hand is completely and frustratingly unwatchable. The cinematography is fine, but the story, the dialog, the characters, the gear, everything about this movie just frustrates me as a writer, an artist, a viewer and a fan. I have only seen it once and I have no desire to re-live that experience. I went into it with low expectations and pretty much knew what I was getting. I went in with an open mind and gave it a fair chance. I still got exactly what I expected. Superficial, shallow (but pretty) rubbish that just doesn't get it.

So much pointless and undirected dialogue. The old rule as I understand it was that every line of dialogue should contribute to or move the story forward. A perfect example of that concept being used is The 5th Element. There is little to no wasted dialogue in that movie. With GB2016 it's mostly noise. Every time someone would start talking it would ruin the scene for me. So much shallow, cringe inducing, inane chatter that just never stopped. The movie felt like it was made by high schoolers. The characters were flat, uninteresting and un-relatable save for Leslie Jones. Her character and performance were actually enjoyable most of the time. She felt like a real person. I like the other actors fine...in other films. I love Kristen Wigg in Paul. I've even enjoyed McCarthy in a couple of things.

But I'm not here to trash on the film. I'm just explaining my choice. Honestly, I don't care enough about the film to argue with someone about it. I don't give a feig if other people liked it. That's fine, knock yourselves out. I know it didn't work for me. I don't need to convince anyone else of that and nothing they have to say is going to change my mind about it anyway.

So if I had to choose between GB2 and GB2016, GB2 would win hands down as it is more thoughtful, entertaining and has more heart and soul.

We're gonna have to disagree on that one. Slimer looked waaaaay better in GB1. I can't stand GB2 Slimer.

I couldn't edit my post so I'll just add this. I'm an idiot and misread what you said, we actually agree on this. My bad.

Yeah GB2 Slimer is just too big and cartoony. In GB1 Slimer was perfect. He looked great, he's kind of cute without being adorable. You don't get the sense that he's evil. He just likes to eat and wants to consume as much as possible. I kind of feel bad for him. He's not hurting anyone(except maybe Venkman).

Ghostbusters II is the clear winner for me. I just love the movie to shreds. It's such a fun movie to watch. With that said, I also enjoyed the reboot. The thing with the reboot is that it is unsure as to what it wants to be. You can say what you want about GB2, but in the end GB2 is concise.

Story wise, GB2 works well. Perhaps it is not the most inventive storyline, but it solid doesn't get bogged down with unnecessary subplots. Perhaps the Louis and Janine subplot doesn't affect the story much, but it is short and you usually expect sequels to focus more on character than storyline compared to first movies. The climax may play out too quickly, but it is to the point. They aren't killing time. The reboot lacks clarity in comparison to GB2. It muddles a bit with subplots such as the government agent subplot. The ending is the weakest part of the film though, where the climax could be a lot stronger had they focused on story more than spectacle. This however I believe to be a trend in new Blockbusters, not just the reboot, where the ending is filled with action, but action that doesn't have meaning. I'm not saying that blockbusters are devoid of meaning, just that there is often less of it than there should be.

The reason for that, I believe, is lack of restraint when it comes to special effects, most likely driven by what the general public wants to see. With GB2, they only had time to produce 180 or so visual effects shots for the movie. They had to make them count. The reboot had 1700 VFX shots. In my opinion, that kind of access to effects makes it easy to dilute the story. With Ghostbusters II they had to be creative and make the most of what they had. Movies nowadays have so much at their disposal, I don't know if it's good for creativity unless the writer has self restraint.

In response to Slimer's differences between 1 and 2, I also prefer the first Slimer. It's interesting that Slimer's look in the second movie was driven by technology differences between what BOSS and ILM were doing. Both technologies created great ghosts, but the designs played to the strengths of the technologies they were designed for, and so by switching Slimer from one technology to the other caused Slimer to not turn out quite as good at ILM as he did at BOSS.

As for the humor... GB2's humor is generated from the story. The reboot's humor is broader and doesn't always pertain directly to the story. If the reboot had spent less time with jokes that are semi-irrelevent to the story, it would've received a better reception within the GB fanbase. However I think that this too was a decision driven by what the general public wants to see. Attention spans are getting shorter and as much as I hate to say it, I think it is causing movies to be mindless in order to keep audience members from completely tuning out. How can you tell a strong story when the audience won't have the attention span to follow it (no matter how good it is)? Don't believe me? Here's some proof: reality TV shows. Complete and total lack of story; completely mindless; aired in prime time slots.

In conclusion, the reboot is not as concise as Ghostbusters II--perhaps out of necessity. It is still an enjoyable movie though. And perhaps future Ghostbusters spin offs will do better amongst the Ghostbusters fanbase if they are smaller and able to cater to niche markets as opposed to the general public. If I had to rate them, I'd give:
Ghostbusters II: 9/10
Answer the Call: 7.5/10

Janosz completely made GB2 if you ask me. Like when Vigo is rattling off his, "I'm the scourge of, I'm the ruler of" speech and Janosz is like "yes yes I've heard all this get on with it". And then Vigo goes ... "COMMAND YOU". And Janosz falls to his knees and is like "COMMAND me oh lord". Like he just wants to be dominated so badly.

Some story beats in GB2 made absolutely no sense to me; the GB suddenly being shown as hacks, Slimer not fitting with the rest of the movie. (You know it might have worked if they somehow turned like the mood slime), Janine changing her character, and the touchy feely stuff with emotions weakening the bad guy. That being said, I loved the humor, the villain, the scary parts and the build up in the courtyard (not that big of a fan of the scoleri bros though).

ATC had some great ideas and designs, but the 3rd act needed more of an end battle. The jokes and tone of the movie is also much lighter, and I wished it took itself a tad more serious.

GB conspiracy:

- If Sony actually did find a way in the contract of Bill to get him to do a GB movie, why did Sony not do a direct sequel?

- If Ivan is against the reboot why did he and Feig have a creative meeting about it where they both happily agreed it should be made?

- If Feig wanted to obliterate GB84 from existence why did he and Ivan both agreed to have nods and callbacks to it?

I've never been a big fan of GB2. Compared to GB1 it was a real let down for me. They went way too hokey and kid-centric for my tastes. However, when placed next to GB2016 it is a work of art. Even with the change of tone, general vibe and cheese I would still put on GB 2 regularly and catch it if it came on TV. I would and can still watch it and get some form of enjoyment and substance from it. The movie still had heart and was well enough made to engage me and even make me laugh and smile. I find as I get older I have grown to appreciate it more. But it's still not as good as the first.

I disagree GB2 was more kid-centric. It always felt darker and scarier to me, minus having a noticably brighter and cleaner look to it which is likely due to it having a bigger budget which shows. But it has many scary moments in it like the heads on the stakes in the subway tunnel, the slime in the bathtub, Ghost Janosz abducting Oscar, many of Vigo's scenes, etc. and for some reason the Horror aspects of it feel more pronounced to me. Just my opinion, though.

As a kid, the heads on stakes were scary to me, and that's about it. I think I was 11 or so when the movie came out. The bathtub had a nice build up, but looked silly to me when it went all rubbery and how easy Dana got away from it. Vigo was just an old mans head full of itself, with Janosz downplaying the tension in almost every scene. Even as a nanny only the stretching hand was 'scary' to me.

Slimer being redesigned as a good guy, the singing, the theme of being nice to each other, the change of Janine character being more dimwitted and sexual design, Tully, Janosz, the dancing toaster and lady liberty (being run by a Ninetndo controller), it all felt very kids friendly, versus the smoking, the blowjobghost and all the sexual innuendo (gatekeeper, keymaster, the song magic) and dickjokes in the original. Which also appeals to kids ofcourse, but more on a teenager/tweens kind of level. GB had a much better build up in the scares department, and delivered on them, when GB2 was more hit and miss.

Mind you, I still loved the movie, but it definitely felt more kidsfriendly with a few (random?) scary scenes tacked on.

GB2 still has quite a bit of raunchy and risque humor in it, with a particularly odd sexual aspect to the mood slime when you think about it. Plus as a kid it didn't dawn on me the phallic imagery of the Slime Blowers which looking at it now as an adult is is pretty blatant. Ray still smokes cigars in some scenes, but I never got the criticism of the reduced smoking levels in GB2 when they didn't even smoke all that much in the original. In regards to Slimer, it seems they definitely based him more on his RGB counterpart but with the deleted scenes and subplot of Louis trying to capture him he may have been somewhat more villainous early on in the original cut. Still wish we'd get the original edit someday.

GB2 did seem like it definitely took aspects of RGB, which I think was a good thing for it to do. I loved RGB and it could be quite dark and scary for a kids' show at times. It seemed with GB2 they wanted to acknowledge RGB while still being a sequel to the first movie, and I think it did an admirable job of that. RGB itself was a wonderful expansion of the first movie's concept. GB2 in a way had the best of both worlds with how it had aspects of GB1 and RGB fused together.

Yeah, it's not all gone, but it's all definitely a lot lighter, with a sharp turn here and there, almost feeling like an afterthought.

Having just read an earlier script of GB2 there is a lot added for the kids. The slime being an obvious one, that was huge in the 80's, it used to be lots and lots of insects drawn to to a building mass of invisible pk power. Slimer was not originally intended to be in it and now that think of it he does feel shoehorned in, I'm kinda glad they kept his extra scenes out as he did not matter to the story at all. I kinda wish they made him matter for a plot point by turning him in a good ghost by reversing his ectoplasm with the mood slime instead of the toaster. The Scoleri Brothers were much more menacing, shooting electricity and blowing up and tearing down the courtroom with their bare hands.

The added bits in the original script where the forced singing and being nice to each other or suffer the consequences were really funny, especially as the New Yorkers tried to politely insult each other, and each haunting being the result of people being angry, bad sports and even killers felt a better fit, as the GB were slowly connecting the dots, but it was all toned down, just like ATC was. Understandable, as kids equal big money and they had not expected to do that well in the kids department with the original, but a bit of a loss as well.

They also have Peck return, work in the blown up headquarters instead of it miraculously being fixed and Peck explains how even the Stay Puft was a hallucination done with gass that blew up, having the set up making a little bit more sense. (Though it still seems weird).

It feels like they first wanted scary, the studio wanted it toned down, and finally they added back some scary stuff like the heads after it was to toned down. (Perhaps because Batman was all dark and moody as well).

^I agree with Alpha on that. In my head canon all these years, I concluded Slimer accidentally ate some of the positively charged mood slime in the R&D lab and that accounts in-universe for how he's more friendly in GB2 but after that he reverts to "normal" as we see in TVG and the comics. But yeah, that was what annoys me about GB2 was Slimer didn't have any scenes with the main cast. I would have liked at least a bit in the montage when Peter opens the Firehouse fridge, green glow, cut to Peter's POV, Slimer is inside and it's a mess, and in typical Bill Murray mode, he doesn't react but just slowly closes the door and walks away. It also drives me nuts to think Janine wasn't in any talking scenes with the main cast either. No banter like GB1.

Yeah, it's not all gone, but it's all definitely a lot lighter, with a sharp turn here and there, almost feeling like an afterthought.

Having just read an earlier script of GB2 there is a lot added for the kids. The slime being an obvious one, that was huge in the 80's, it used to be lots and lots of insects drawn to to a building mass of invisible pk power. Slimer was not originally intended to be in it and now that think of it he does feel shoehorned in, I'm kinda glad they kept his extra scenes out as he did not matter to the story at all. I kinda wish they made him matter for a plot point by turning him in a good ghost by reversing his ectoplasm with the mood slime instead of the toaster. The Scoleri Brothers were much more menacing, shooting electricity and blowing up and tearing down the courtroom with their bare hands.

The added bits in the original script where the forced singing and being nice to each other or suffer the consequences were really funny, especially as the New Yorkers tried to politely insult each other, and each haunting being the result of people being angry, bad sports and even killers felt a better fit, as the GB were slowly connecting the dots, but it was all toned down, just like ATC was. Understandable, as kids equal big money and they had not expected to do that well in the kids department with the original, but a bit of a loss as well.

They also have Peck return, work in the blown up headquarters instead of it miraculously being fixed and Peck explains how even the Stay Puft was a hallucination done with gass that blew up, having the set up making a little bit more sense. (Though it still seems weird).

It feels like they first wanted scary, the studio wanted it toned down, and finally they added back some scary stuff like the heads after it was to toned down. (Perhaps because Batman was all dark and moody as well).

Yeah the story became much more coherent and sharper, but you can see how they changed the tone to being more kid friendly.

I wish to god they would've included the murder/suicide scene in the finished film somehow..It's the best scene in the original draft. The well to do couple are getting ready for an outing and the wife is going on and on and on, meanwhile the husband is loading his gun and about to murder her before the insects burst in. It's such a great scene. It's so dark.

But...I didn't like the insect thing. It's not visually interesting and had been done to death in Indiana Jones and other movies. I love the mood slime. It's a great little metaphor. Sure it's a tad cheesy but I love it. It's a great idea. Plus the Statue of Liberty being used for evil is no good. They made the right call there in the end using it as a force for good. The opening of the original draft is, again, hard to imagine. Feels more like something in Godfather Part 2 than Ghostbusters. Baby carriage opening is much better.